ROHTASH SINGH vs GOVT. OF N.C.T. OF DELHI & ORS

Judgment text excerpt

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RFA 548/2004 ROHTASH SINGH .....Appellant Through: Mr. Aayush Agarwala and Ms. Malika Luthra, Advocates Mob: 9309523696 Email: [email protected] versus GOVT. OF N.C.T. OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Dhruv Rohatgi, Ms. Chandrika Sachdev, Mr. Dhruv Kumar, Advocates for R-1, 3 & 4 M:9643400939 Email: [email protected] Ms. Manisha Tyagi, Adv for R-2 (through VC) CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA JUDGMENT % 08.09.2025 1. The present Regular First Appeal has been filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”), against the judgment and decree dated 27th February, 2004, passed by the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Delhi in Suit bearing no. 130/02. The suit was filed on behalf of the appellant/plaintiff for recovery of Rs. 4,50,000/- along with interest. 2. By way of the impugned judgment and decree, the Trial Court decreed the suit in favour of the appellant for Rs. 15,000/-, with interest @ 6% per annum from 23rd September, 2002, until realisation, along with the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed RFA 548/2004 Page 1 of 25 By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Date:08.09.2025 21:00:15 caveat that if the said amount was not paid to the appellant by 15th April, 2004, the appellant shall be entitled to claim interest @ 9% per annum from 15th April, 2004, till realisation, along with proportionate costs. Respondent nos. 1 to 3, who were defendant nos. 1 to 3 in the Trial Court, were held jointly and severally liable to pay the decretal amount. 3. Before delving into the facts in hand, this Court notes that vide order dated 05th September, 2016, respondent no. 3 was directed to file an Amended Memo of Parties, reflecting the fresh address of respondent no. 3. However, respondent